Am 15.08.2014 22:33, schrieb jhu:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> Am 14.08.2014 09:25, schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>>> On 14-8-2014 0:07, Stephen wrote:
>>>> To me that is much better, I can see the cat now. ;-)
>>>> IMO these images with deep shadows and bright sunlight need a compromise
>>>> as our eyes adjust in RL. But cannot do that on an image.
>>>> Don't you think that there should be some dust in the air?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Yes, and the compromising is delicate as the notion of 'acceptable'
>>> tends to vary from person to person in this case. In the present case a
>>> bit lighter or darker would also be possible. ;-)
>>
>> Not only does the notion of "acceptable" vary from person to person, but
>> -- I guess even more importantly -- it also varies from display to
>> display. Experience in these newsgroups has shown over and over again
>> that people complaining about images being too dark tend to change their
>> mind once they have been coaxed to calibrate their display properly.
>
> Nonsense. They just need to increase/decrease the number and density of
> rods/cones in their eyes.

That actually wouldn't do the trick. Turning off any other light sources 
in the room might though, if the problem is reflection glare.

For wearers of corrective eyegear like me, cleaning the glasses from 
time to time might also help ;-)

(And yes, dusting off the display may also helpful.)

Post a reply to this message